The image above illustrates Nadine Winters, Washington D.C.’s ward 6 council woman, who served for sixteen year from (1975-1991). Ward 6 includes multiple neighborhoods including Shaw. She was council woman during the green line’s planning and its opening on March 11, 1991. She was a notable figure who faced the challenges in addressing the area’s post-civil rights movement, and its drug problem. In fact, she was a key figure in stabilizing the neighborhood as the director of the Hospitality House Inc., one of the first shelters to house entire families, where she provided a plan for low-income individuals to purchase vacant government-owned properties, at prices as low as $1, to people who agreed to fix them up and stay for at least five years. In Shaw the last 40 years the housing dynamic has drastically shifted from investing in public housing and low-income affordable homes to million dollar townhouses.
The image above is a post 9/11 campaign in New York City, “If you see something, say something,” was a response to the 2001 World Trade Center attack. The poster above can be found in New York city’s areas of public transportation, like train stations, bus stops, and airports. The legitimacy of the campaign is done through the incorporation of official government agencies and departments logos, including New York City Department and Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The advertisement suggests the appropriate steps for an individual to take if ever encountered with a suspicious unattended package. The “If you see something, say something,” campaign originally began in New York City, but since has expanded to other metropolitan cities like Washington D.C. The expansion of the campaign can be accredited to many reasons, but I believe two main reasons is the rise of domestic terrorism and the effective use of epistrophe in the slogan, ” If you see something, say something” the repetition of “something” is effective because it is clear to the public anything that seems out of place can be viewed with suspicion, which is also enforced by the image which illustrates a black bag sitting unattened. Also, the slogan is short, striking, and a memorable phrase has been an effective way for addressing terrorism in the NYC tri-state area, which has caught in other respective metropolitan areas for the risk of a potential attack.
In her article “His & Hers? Designing for a Post-Gender Society,” Suzanne Tick discusses the need for society to familiarize themselves with a new post-gender society. In her article, she addresses the sectors of society that are supporting gender-neutral roles in different ways (e.g. Google creating all-inclusive bathrooms). In fact, Suzanne argues the post gender movement is a response to media and politics challenging it. A grand facilitator of the gender-neutral movement has been both through the fashion and business industry, along with job and college applications. Another facilitator for gender neutral norms is through gender-neutral bathrooms, which allow individuals to feel comfortable.
The image above is an example of what a gender neutral toilet resembles.
The image above illustrates the fashion industry reject gender norms.
In sum, Tick argues society must normalize gender neutrality through public means. Ultimately, her argument adds to the conversation of how public means is enabling gender norms to be questioned, and redefined. Blurring the lines in fashion, business, restrooms, and other sectors society will allow society to normalize gender neutrality.
The image is calling for an individual using the restroom to be aware this particular restroom is available for everyone regardless of their gender identity. The sign is thanking everyone for making it an inclusive environment, and then goes into instructions on how an individual can enhance a sense of safety and security. The image is sponsored by American University’s Housing & Dining Programs demonstrating the university’s stance is in favor of providing all inclusive bathrooms to those who’s gender identity may not align with their physical gender.
The root of the sentence is: Bathroom available for everyone. A few key terms that stand out are: inclusive, different, lock, and gender identity. In response to North Carolina legalizing students in state schools to use the bathroom corresponding with the gender recorded on their birth certificates, and Georgia protecting “religious liberty” by allowing faith-based groups to deny services to LGBT individuals. After North Carolina’s law, gender identity because a hot button topic, and many states and institutions responded with establishing all inclusive restrooms, like the one you see above.
Nobel prize laureate in literature, Samuel Beckett, mentions failure as an inevitable component in improving in his work “Worstward Ho!”. In it Beckett writes,“Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”; the significance of this paragraph is because Beckett conveys an unusual message is often not accredited to failure. The paragraph promote tenacity, and Beckett does not allow failure to derail an individual from pursuing or trying again. On the contrary, Beckett encourages an individual to keep on pursuing by placing a positive connotation to failure, by humanizing it. For instance, his use of anaphora, “Ever tried. Ever failed.”, places emphasis on both “tried” and “failed”, later used as an anaphora in the last three sentences. Use of the period in this entire paragraph is being used as a tool in emphasizing a statement, as if there is no room for questioning. Perhaps, the simple structure must with the topic of the paragraph that failure is as simple and normal as his simple sentence structure. However, I do believe Beckett strategically chose to use simple sentence structure over commas, exclamation point, question marks, or other forms of punctuation as a strategic move on his behalf. For instance, if he placed two question marks for the first two sentences and exclamation points for each sentence would drastically transform the paragraphs’ relationship to “Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter! Try again! Fail again! Fail better! “. The transformed sentence is no longer emphasizing the first two sentences as statement, but now changes the relationship of simple structure to a rhetorical one, and it is followed by commands that are expressed through exclamation points. Both simple and rhetorical/ exclaiming structures assume the author’s audience has tried and failed, but the transformed version demands and pressures his audience, unlike the simple structure which simply states the entire phrase as a truth.
If the formatting was in DC, IC form the relationship and meaning of the sentence would look a bit like, “Ever tried, ever failed, but no matter try again, fail again, and fail better.” Frankly Beckett’s original version offers a sense of emphasis where it is needed, and it perhaps more effective in conveying his message of normalizing failure because it does not question or demand anything of his audience. His message has lived on since his publishing “Worstward Ho!” in 1983, and has transcended into different electronic social media platforms creating the hashtag, #Failbetter, which I would be inclined to argue would have not caught on if Beckett placed exclamation points at the end of his two sentences, because individuals attempting to improve a lifestyle don’t want to feel like they are being told to do so. The father of successful failures and failing better was strategic in being conscious of his audience, and understood improving or modifying a particular behavior is to be empathetic rather than be demanding. The phrase has had such an impact that there was a FAIL BIG event on March 28th, where fail tales were drawn from artists, musicians, and scientists social media platforms. Some food for thought: if Beckett would have not used simple structure, would the lives it has impacted thus far be Vietcong failure with a positive connotation.
The image above illustrates an elementary’s school poster board on “How To Save Paper.” Ironically the school demonstrates “How To Save Paper” by using paper a 10′ x 8′ sheet of paper for each letter in the title, which totals to 14 pieces of paper. Below the title, there are descriptions essentially describing how to save paper by recycling. For instance, one states ” A way to save paper is to reduce, reuse, recycle .” The list at the end of the sentence effectively applies alliteration to emphasize on “How to save paper,” and the omission of a conjunction between reuse and recycle allows the phrase to easily flow, allowing individuals to easily remember on how to save paper.
To place recycling paper into context it began in the late 17th century when the Rittenhouse Mill in Philadelphia opened and began recycling linen and cotton rags. The paper produced from these materials was sold to printers for use in Bibles and newspapers.
In his final chapter of City of Rhetoric, David Fleming argues the importance of civic engagement, because politics is what shapes the city in which one lives in. Flemming stresses the importance of questioning one’s city to understand the purpose of space and place, because engaging in that conversation allows for an individual to understand the underlying relationship of space, place, and how an individual is placed into that conversation.
The image above illustrates Athens, home of city of rhetoric.
Furthermore, in his final chapter Flemming stresses a city’s design should benefit everyone in the city, rather than a selected few with influence with wealth. Firstly, He leaves a message for his reader his book to be equipped with how to design an equal rhetorical society. Secondly, in his message he states citizens should be invested in their local government. Lastly, He believes politics is the way for individuals to be directly involved and improve the change they seek.
In summation, David Fleming argues the importance of civic engagement by understanding the relationship between citizens and cities. Through socio-economic conditions and insufficient education some citizens are vulnerable to the power of rhetoric. Mainly because they don’t know how to engage in the public sphere, and much less the power of rhetoric influencing their decision making. He stresses for every stakeholder to feel like their opinion matters in society they must be civically engaged. Because he ultimately believes Individuals shapes a city’s infrastructure and social space.
The article on the neighborhood of Shaw within the District of Columbia’s website provides a brief summary of the neighborhood’s composition and history. The page highlights restaurants within the neighborhood that are up incoming along with the neighborhood. Hyperlinks make the website easily navigable to local establishments and accessible for an individual to access and view a restaurant’s menu, hours, and specialties. Additionally, hyperlinks make the website easily navigable to local establishments and accessible for an individual to access and view a restaurant’s menu, hours, and specialties.
This image is a screen shot Shaw’s website with my rhetorical analysis
This website will serve as an argument source, because the article provided a bias for gentrification due to the fact that did not incorporate establishments that were present in the neighborhood. As I begin my rhetorical analysis essay the webpage affirms the argument that D.C. is selling a narrative aimed towards young, affluent professionals, not accentuating or marketing pre-existing food establishments. I intend to use to page to discuss the bias in language that is used to describe the newly gentrified sections of D.C compared to its counterpart.
Sarah Schilndler, writer of Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment, believes that the government can regulate the infrastructure and architecture which ultimately shapes the lives, experiences and behaviors of individuals. Infrastructure’s role and impact on society is often overlooked. Individuals must be aware of the power of placement of architecture and how its power implicitly dictates human behavior. Schindler emphasized the importance of policy and legislation, but ultimately she believes that architecture is more powerful than law in regards to urban development.
This article is a method source that has provided me the means of access into understanding how the development of Shaw systemically impacts those who reside in the the neighborhood. As I begin my rhetorical analysis essay this article provides an analytical framework so that city developers and researchers understand the implications that urban planning has. I intend to use Schindler’s analytical framework to emphasize how intentional the placement of specific resources and development of Shaw in regards to housing segregation and exclusion.
The image above illustrates the Lincoln Theater Exterior view, shows marquee advertising movie “Personal Property”, with Jean Harlow and Robert Taylor. This image was taken the DC Race Riots during the mid-1960s. The theater closed after the 1968 race-related riots. It was restored and reopened in 1994, and hosts a variety of performances and events. The theater, located on “Washington’s Black Broadway”, once served as the city’s African American community when segregation kept them out of other venues. The Lincoln Theater included a movie house and ballroom, and hosted jazz and big band performers like Duke Ellington.
In comparison to the image above, the image below illustrates the current state of the Lincoln theater. Quite frankly, the difference is very minimal, in fact one can argue the only difference from an exterior perspective is the color in the second image. However, another difference is the U Street Metro station, which opened in 1991, and is located right across the street from Lincoln Theater. In regards to Lincoln’s Theater interior wise, the theater has gone under renovation and preservation since 1994. Today the theater hosts great performances and performers like it once did during Duke Ellington’s time.
The image above illustrates the demolition site of the 1975 Watha T. Daniel Library. The two story building contained adult reading room, a lounge area, and a listening booth on the first floor while the second floor provided space for a children’s room complete with a specially designed enclosure for story hour. Originally local tax payers were informed of a two year project, which turned into a six year project from 2004 to 2010. The Shaw had received enough public funds to invest nearly $12 million. In the span of 6 years students who depended on the library were deprived of internet and educational access. The delay of reconstruction inspired residents to protest against the 2 year hiatus in 2006, but efforts did not seem enough to government officials who did not have the project finalized until 2010.